CBB Matchups

Every D1 game with tempo-free ratings, four factors and market lines, one place.

College basketball is being built for the 2026-27 season (tip-off Nov 3). What's here fills in as games are played.

Non-conferenceMichael J. Hagan '85 Arena, Philadelphia, PA

Wagner

Efficiency #285

2025-26: 14-17 · 9-11 conf

Saint Joseph's

Efficiency #118

2025-26: 24-12 · 14-6 conf

Tue, Nov 17 · TBD

66.5

win 20%

Projected

76.3

win 80%

No line posted yet.

Model: JOES −9.9 · total 142.8 · ratings as of Sat, Oct 3

Preseason ratings start from 2025-26's final adjusted ratings, regressed toward the D1 average. The stats below are 2025-26's too; both update once 2026-27 games are played.

How the projection is built

each step, from an average D-I game to this one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Saint Joseph's 68.8, Wagner 67.0 → 67.5 possessions

−1.8

Saint Joseph's offense vs Wagner defense

+1.2

Wagner offense vs Saint Joseph's defense

−4.8

Projected total

142.8

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Saint Joseph's offense vs Wagner defense

+1.2

Wagner offense vs Saint Joseph's defense

+4.8

Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors

+3.9

Saint Joseph's by 9.9

9.9

Wagner side ◂▸ Saint Joseph's side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Saint Joseph's.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Saint Joseph's is the faster team (68.2, #192 of 365) and Wagner the slower (65.3, #323). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.5

per team, 40 min

Projected total

142.8

model

Projected team totals

66.5 / 76.3

Wagner / Saint Joseph's

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.0#285

Wagner

68.8#137

Saint Joseph's

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet

AdvantageWagner

Where Wagner struggles: shooting

Wagner shoots an effective 49.6% (#262); Saint Joseph's allows 47.7% (#34). Expect about 48.4%, 2.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.0 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageSaint Joseph's

Where Saint Joseph's struggles: shooting

Saint Joseph's shoots an effective 49.2% (#284); Wagner allows 50.4% (#123). Expect about 49.6%, 1.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Saint Joseph's, Wagner) is close to a coin flip going forward — the study's model of next-game 3P% barely beats guessing the D1 average. Shot volume is what actually carries: expect Wagner at about 37.3% of its shots from three, Saint Joseph's about 41.6%.

ClashSaint Joseph's

Style clash: 3-point volume

Saint Joseph's takes 45.1% of its shots from three; Wagner runs teams off the line (35.8% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 41.6% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).

ClashWagner

Strength vs strength: 3-point shooting

Wagner (#36 in 3-point shooting) against Saint Joseph's (#51 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 34.1%. Historically Wagner's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.25 vs 0.16).

Wagner has the ball

OffenseSaint Joseph's allowsvs D1 avg

49.6% #262

47.7% #34

-4.0 pt/100

18.5% #301

15.0% #286

+0.1 pt/100

32.8% #96

30.6% #185

+1.1 pt/100

32.3% #252

26.9% #20

-0.8 pt/100

72.6% #184

—

+0.0 pt/100

Wagner net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.6 pts/100

Saint Joseph's has the ball

OffenseWagner allowsvs D1 avg

49.2% #284

50.4% #123

-2.4 pt/100

16.8% #182

14.9% #294

+1.4 pt/100

31.4% #147

29.6% #139

+0.2 pt/100

29.7% #318

40.8% #309

+0.1 pt/100

73.8% #138

—

+0.1 pt/100

Saint Joseph's net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.5 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers

Wagneroffense vsSaint Joseph'sdefense

Share of shots by zone

Wagner shoots

40.3

7.6

16.3

35.8

Saint Joseph's allows

33.5

7.3

19.5

39.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	50.3%#359	52.6%#21	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	45.0%#64	41.5%#226	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	40.0%#109	38.3%#168	38.0%
Three	36.6%#36	31.7%#51	33.7%

Saint Joseph'soffense vsWagnerdefense

Share of shots by zone

Saint Joseph's shoots

40.1

4.5

11.0

44.5

Wagner allows

41.2

6.9

15.7

36.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.2%#189	53.5%#31	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	35.7%#273	46.5%#326	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	34.0%#312	37.5%#141	38.0%
Three	30.8%#325	34.3%#202	33.7%

RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three

Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).

Shot volume

Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul line · 2025-26 numbers

Wagner

−3.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#312 of 365

Off reb %

32.8%

#96

Def reb %

70.4%

#139

Turnover %

18.5%

#301

Forced TO %

14.9%

#294

FT rate

32.3%

#252

FT allowed

40.8%

#309

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.8

Defensive rebounding+0.3

Ball security−1.2

Forcing turnovers−1.2

Foul shots drawn−0.7

Foul shots allowed−1.4

Saint Joseph's

0.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#181 of 365

Off reb %

31.4%

#147

Def reb %

69.4%

#185

Turnover %

16.8%

#182

Forced TO %

15.0%

#286

FT rate

29.7%

#318

FT allowed

26.9%

#20

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.3

Defensive rebounding0.0

Ball security0.0

Forcing turnovers−1.1

Foul shots drawn−1.4

Foul shots allowed+2.1

Saint Joseph's has more extra scoring chances per game: 0.0 (#181 of 365) to Wagner’s −3.4 (#312).

Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).

Rotation

Wagner2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Wagner's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Nick Jones	G	Jr	6'2"	29-22	32.1	14.9	3.6	2.5	2.7	47.1%	28.3%	3.7	82.6%	31.7%
7	Eddie Placer	G	Jr	6'5"	30-14	25.9	8.5	2.4	1.3	1.1	51.1%	39.0%	4.5	77.8%	21.1%
9	Jaden Baker	G	Sr	6'2"	24-24	31.8	9.3	3.6	3.2	2.1	45.6%	35.4%	4.0	77.8%	22.2%
4	John Awoke	G	Jr	6'3"	29-10	26.2	7.1	3.0	2.0	1.4	48.7%	36.3%	3.5	78.6%	19.6%
22	Binael Basil	F	So	6'7"	30-21	22.7	8.9	6.1	1.1	1.5	57.3%	31.3%	0.5	56.4%	24.5%
10	Bryan Akanmu	F	Jr	6'6"	31-21	20.3	6.2	3.9	1.4	1.5	48.2%	0.0%	0.2	65.9%	23.0%
2	Travis Gray	G	Sr	6'5"	21-12	21.5	8.7	5.6	0.5	0.8	49.3%	34.9%	4.0	76.4%	25.4%
1	Zavier Fitch	F	So	6'7"	18-10	23.2	6.8	6.2	1.1	1.0	55.0%	37.9%	1.6	59.0%	17.9%
5	Michael Cooper	G	Jr	6'6"	31-5	13.4	4.8	2.4	0.6	0.9	48.6%	34.9%	1.4	82.4%	23.6%
15	Makhai Anderson	G	So	6'6"	22-7	9.5	3.4	2.2	0.4	0.4	50.0%	27.3%	0.5	67.6%	21.6%
3	Elijah Brown	G	Fr	6'4"	19-4	6.2	1.7	0.3	0.1	0.3	66.7%	66.7%	0.3	66.7%	14.8%
24	Sam Smith	F	Sr	6'6"	7-2	15.4	9.0	5.1	0.6	0.7	59.4%	33.3%	2.1	100.0%	28.8%
12	Huascar Cuevas	G	Jr	5'11"	5-3	13.4	2.6	1.0	0.6	1.6	55.0%	42.9%	1.4	100.0%	16.3%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Saint Joseph's2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Derek Simpson	G	Sr	6'3"	36-36	33.9	13.8	5.3	5.2	2.1	49.1%	31.5%	5.0	91.7%	25.5%
11	Jaiden Glover-Toscano	G	So	6'6"	34-34	31.4	15.7	4.8	1.0	1.4	52.2%	34.6%	7.6	72.8%	29.4%
7	Dasear Haskins	G	So	6'8"	36-36	27.7	11.1	6.4	1.4	1.2	53.8%	29.9%	3.5	67.6%	23.6%
13	Austin Williford	G	Fr	6'4"	36-19	26.2	7.8	4.7	1.4	1.2	47.5%	33.6%	4.0	69.8%	20.4%
22	Justice Ajogbor	C	Sr	6'10"	36-33	26.0	6.5	4.9	1.3	0.8	66.4%	—	0.0	60.0%	13.0%
5	Anthony Finkley	F	Jr	6'7"	35-13	19.0	5.4	3.3	1.6	1.3	38.2%	28.8%	3.2	80.8%	22.2%
3	Khaafiq Myers	G	Fr	5'10"	34-0	15.8	5.1	2.9	2.3	1.1	42.8%	25.0%	1.8	60.6%	25.4%
23	Mekai Johnson	G	So	6'5"	17-0	4.2	1.2	0.4	0.1	0.1	52.9%	18.2%	0.6	100.0%	15.8%
21	Al Amadou	F	So	6'9"	11-0	6.3	1.4	0.8	0.3	0.5	54.5%	0.0%	0.2	42.9%	15.9%
15	Steven Solano	C	So	7'0"	8-0	4.1	1.9	1.3	0.1	0.5	77.8%	—	0.0	50.0%	23.8%
24	Will Lange	G	Jr	6'4"	5-0	3.4	0.8	0.6	0.2	0.2	33.3%	0.0%	0.2	100.0%	15.6%
20	Billy Rayer	G	So	5'11"	6-0	2.0	0.5	0.2	0.2	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.5	—	18.4%
6	Owen Verna	G	Fr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Wagner2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Wagner's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Nick Jones	G	Jr	6'2"	29-22	32.1	14.9	3.6	2.5	2.7	47.1%	28.3%	3.7	82.6%	31.7%
7	Eddie Placer	G	Jr	6'5"	30-14	25.9	8.5	2.4	1.3	1.1	51.1%	39.0%	4.5	77.8%	21.1%
9	Jaden Baker	G	Sr	6'2"	24-24	31.8	9.3	3.6	3.2	2.1	45.6%	35.4%	4.0	77.8%	22.2%
4	John Awoke	G	Jr	6'3"	29-10	26.2	7.1	3.0	2.0	1.4	48.7%	36.3%	3.5	78.6%	19.6%
22	Binael Basil	F	So	6'7"	30-21	22.7	8.9	6.1	1.1	1.5	57.3%	31.3%	0.5	56.4%	24.5%
10	Bryan Akanmu	F	Jr	6'6"	31-21	20.3	6.2	3.9	1.4	1.5	48.2%	0.0%	0.2	65.9%	23.0%
2	Travis Gray	G	Sr	6'5"	21-12	21.5	8.7	5.6	0.5	0.8	49.3%	34.9%	4.0	76.4%	25.4%
1	Zavier Fitch	F	So	6'7"	18-10	23.2	6.8	6.2	1.1	1.0	55.0%	37.9%	1.6	59.0%	17.9%
5	Michael Cooper	G	Jr	6'6"	31-5	13.4	4.8	2.4	0.6	0.9	48.6%	34.9%	1.4	82.4%	23.6%
15	Makhai Anderson	G	So	6'6"	22-7	9.5	3.4	2.2	0.4	0.4	50.0%	27.3%	0.5	67.6%	21.6%
3	Elijah Brown	G	Fr	6'4"	19-4	6.2	1.7	0.3	0.1	0.3	66.7%	66.7%	0.3	66.7%	14.8%
24	Sam Smith	F	Sr	6'6"	7-2	15.4	9.0	5.1	0.6	0.7	59.4%	33.3%	2.1	100.0%	28.8%
12	Huascar Cuevas	G	Jr	5'11"	5-3	13.4	2.6	1.0	0.6	1.6	55.0%	42.9%	1.4	100.0%	16.3%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Wagner

Against the spread

Season

15-12-1

Home

4-5-1

Road

11-7

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +3.2

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-13

Home

5-5

Road

10-8

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −1.9

Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 7	Long IslandAdjEM #195	A	L 56–64	+6.5	L−1.5	139.0	U120	87.6	100.1	63.9
Mar 4	C ConnecticutAdjEM #277	A	W 70–60	+3.5	W+13.5	138.5	U130	114.0	97.7	61.4
Feb 28	Chicago StAdjEM #342	H	W 80–61	−5.0	W+14.0	135.5	O141	116.2	88.6	68.9
Feb 26	New HavenAdjEM #326	H	W 65–62	−2.0	W+1.0	131.5	U127	104.3	99.5	62.3
Feb 21	Saint Francis Red Wolves	A	W 65–56	−1.5	W+7.5	152.0	U121	100.0	86.2	65.0
Feb 19	MercyhurstAdjEM #261	A	W 83–80 OT	+3.5	W+6.5	134.5	O163	111.4	107.3	74.5
Feb 16	Long IslandAdjEM #195	A	L 65–83	+10.5	L−7.5	137.0	O148	101.9	130.1	63.8
Feb 14	StonehillAdjEM #320	A	W 68–57	+3.0	W+14.0	129.5	U125	103.2	86.5	65.9
Feb 12	Long IslandAdjEM #195	H	L 57–67	+6.5	L−3.5	135.0	U124	81.2	95.5	70.2
Feb 7	C ConnecticutAdjEM #277	A	L 67–84	+5.0	L−12.0	136.5	O151	102.0	127.9	65.7

Saint Joseph's

Against the spread

Season

20-14

Home

8-6

Road

10-6

Last 10

8-2

avg cover +5.5

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

10-23-1

Home

7-7

Road

3-12-1

Last 10

2-7-1

avg vs total −2.6

Under 5 straightOver in 1 of 7 as an underdog, 1 push

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 24	New MexicoAdjEM #42	A	L 69–84	+10.5	L−4.5	155.0	U153	93.5	113.9	73.8
Mar 22	CaliforniaAdjEM #79	A	W 76–75	+5.5	W+6.5	151.5	U151	111.9	110.4	67.9
Mar 18	Colorado StAdjEM #88	A	W 69–64	+6.0	W+11.0	145.5	U133	103.0	95.5	67.0
Mar 14	VCUAdjEM #39	N	L 64–77	+6.5	L−6.5	146.0	U141	98.4	118.4	65.0
Mar 13	DavidsonAdjEM #112	N	W 70–58	−2.0	W+10.0	132.5	U128	114.6	95.0	61.1
Mar 7	La SalleAdjEM #256	H	W 88–76	−10.5	W+1.5	142.5	O164	128.0	110.5	68.8
Mar 4	DavidsonAdjEM #112	A	W 70–67	+2.5	W+5.5	137.0	P137	106.7	102.1	65.6
Feb 28	Rhode IslandAdjEM #137	A	W 61–55	+2.0	W+8.0	141.0	U116	86.8	78.3	70.3
Feb 25	George MasonAdjEM #83	H	W 81–63	+1.0	W+19.0	136.5	O144	125.7	97.7	64.5
Feb 21	Loyola ChicagoAdjEM #309	H	W 75–61	−9.5	W+4.5	142.0	U136	113.9	92.6	65.9

Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home

WagnerSaint Joseph's

Efficiency

105.3

107.1

111.6

104.5

67.0

68.8

—

Shooting

49.6%

49.2%

46.6%

51.7%

36.6%

30.8%

72.6%

73.8%

32.3%

29.7%

Ball control & glass

18.5%

16.8%

14.9%

15.0%

32.8%

31.4%

29.6%

30.6%

10.7%

9.7%

10.4%

10.8%

Style

36.1%

45.1%

41.6%

44.1%

9.4%

15.5%

48.9%

59.6%

36.5%

26.1%

Roster

2.97

2.54

6'4.4"

6'5.5"

—

90.9%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input

Wagner

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Wagner's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.

Returns 100% of last season's minutes. Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026). (ESPN hasn't posted this season's roster yet -- this may still be last season's list.)

Saint Joseph's

Returning minutes: 90.9%Returning production: 91.4%

Lost

Jaden Smith 9.1 mpg, 2.8 ppg · transferred to Ball State
Deuce Jones 7.5 mpg, 4.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Kevin Kearney 1.6 mpg, 0.3 ppg · transferred to Manhattan

Added

Owen Verna no D1 minutes last season

No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.

Returns 91% of last season's minutes. Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026).

Head-to-head

this season and last

No meetings the last two seasons.

The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — Pinnacle's spread and total (the median across books when Pinnacle has no line). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, built bottom-up from those same numbers: expected possessions times each side's opponent-adjusted points per possession, plus home court.

What these numbers mean: line shopping.